View Full Version : Cooperative multiplayer
Anyone would like to try cooperative multiplayer?
I propose 2 ways:
1) Someone would start with one kingdom, play with one kingdom and after some time (either some certain time or one king's rule) save the game and give the save file to the others who will continue with the same kingdom
but I personaly would prefere
2) one starts, play certain time and then some other player will pick some other kingdom for the same amount of time, while the original kingdom is left to AI
If anyone is interested, tell me..
We need to make the rules.
1) How many players will play? (I propose up to 3-4)
2) What game version will we play? I think we can combine various mods, but I think that at least mapversion should be only one. In this case I would recomend HR 1.7mapchanges)
What we need to have the same is: buildings, kingdoms, units. Other things might probably vary, but it would be the best to play one version only
3) How long will be the time period? I propose shorter: either 1 king's rule or 30 minutes
4) pause during battles: on or off?
5) which period and kingdoms to pick
6) who will start
I am open to your suggestions, I would propose those:
1) 3-4 (depending on how many will be interested)
2) At the moment I propose HR 1.7
3) as above 1 king life or 30 minutes(if the king dies too soon) - maybe the first 30 minutes should change per 10 minutes as the starting conditions are very important - the kingdom may disappear
4) pause on as the battle could take too long time
5) depending on people interested. I would like to pick one of those Bohemia in high, Normans or Ani in early or Flandres or Bohemia in the late (depending also on the starter - if I would start I would pick less powerfull kingdom, if my kingdom disapears befor I start I would take some other)
6) for this I don't care. But the starter should pick only the game where the other players' kingdoms will have at least 1 province feature to have vetter ability for better development
Angryminer
18-03-2006, 23:34
I'm definitely interested.
1. Shouldn't exceed 4. 4 players would mean: I govern 30 minutes, the AI governs my kingdom 90 minutes.
2. I'd like to go for standard units and buildings. Pretty much everything vanilla beside the map. Perhaps some changes that make the AI kingdoms more stable, like no nostalgia or so.
3. 30 minutes sounds good to me. Remember, we can't measure a king's life. When your king dies and you send me the savegame my king may already be old so I play significantly less than you.
4. Pause on. One battle can last well over 15 minutes when pause is off (and the enemy brings in reinforcements and reinforcements).
5. I'd like to go for early. Bigger kingdoms makes things more stable, which is definitely desirable in our game.
6. The one who has the chosen map installed. Propably you.
Angryminer
in 1. and 4. I definitely agree. The last 2 I don't care that much so I also agree.
2) I didn't get everything well. Pretty much everything like in vanilla "Beside the map" you mean including the map, am I right? So the vanilla map?
I would prefere to give AI more stability (when the AI will govern my kingdom for 90 minutes it may destroy al I have made if it is vanilla AI)
3) Here I also agree. I meant it just for some enfreshment, to make the game be influenced by life rather than numbers(time). I didn't mean it strictly like king dies, you leave the game when you played 5 minutes. It was more like when your king dies in your 25th minute, you could leave the game but when your king is venerable, you could wait untill he dies in 35th minute
But as I see it from perspective of AI governing the kingdom for 60-90 minutes you are right that it would be far better to make the kingdom stable before you leave it :go:
Also it is much more fair-the equality should be as high as possible (beyond the kingdom one choses)
7) I really think that at the very beggining we should change after 5 minutes, at least the first round, in the name of equal chances. Especialy if you prefere the vanilla which AI is very passive in hiring knights. It's a big diference when your kingdom is with 1 merchant as it would be with vanilla AI and with 3-4 as it would be if almost any player starts the game
I'm interested for sure! I''ll have a look at this later today.
Did you think about diplomacy already? The AI will govern all diplomacy decisions between the players, which isn't exactly what I'd call optimal..
1) 4 players, I agree.
2) Everybody the same pack of course - which would mean, KoH vanilla + HR1.7 mapchanges - maybe removal of war exhaustion and nostalgia or some more points all mods agreed on [didn't we agree on that? :)]
3) 30 minutes would be perfect, don't you think?
4) Pause on - fighting should not take time off the 30 minutes. Or is this misusable?
5) Any period, I'd say, and any kingdom. Just pick as hard as you like it. That could be done in cooperation, no? I mean, if Elvain told me he'd want to play byzantium, I could think - let's have a hard game, let's play some little 1 province kingdom.
6) Anybody could start, yes?
How would be disable cheating, do the diplomacy? Probably we'll need the kingdom penalty of breaking relations removed.. what if your enemy (e.g. Doux) makes an Alliances with you (the AI is controlling at that moment) and you don't want it, but the AI agrees?
Also, we need the bsswitch cheat, of course. And bsnoai/bsai. But other money cheats can't be allowed really.
Maybe this gets too complicated already..
1) 4 players, I agree.
2) Everybody the same pack of course - which would mean, KoH vanilla + HR1.7 mapchanges - maybe removal of war exhaustion and nostalgia or some more points all mods agreed on [didn't we agree on that? :)]
3) 30 minutes would be perfect, don't you think?
4) Pause on - fighting should not take time off the 30 minutes. Or is this misusable?
5) Any period, I'd say, and any kingdom. Just pick as hard as you like it. That could be done in cooperation, no? I mean, if Elvain told me he'd want to play byzantium, I could think - let's have a hard game, let's play some little 1 province kingdom.
6) Anybody could start, yes?
How would be disable cheating, do the diplomacy? Probably we'll need the kingdom penalty of breaking relations removed.. what if your enemy (e.g. Doux) makes an Alliances with you (the AI is controlling at that moment) and you don't want it, but the AI agrees?
Also, we need the bsswitch cheat, of course. And bsnoai/bsai. But other money cheats can't be allowed really.
Maybe this gets too complicated already..complete agree to this :go:
of course we'd need bsswitch and bsnoai/bsai but those of course being used only when the player is being changed.
So Patched vanilla 1.03 with HR1.7 mapchanges and...?
war exhaustion on 5(max)
reduced KP penalty for breaking agreements to max -1
nostalgia to max 5
???
is this ok?
it seems we are three.. anybody else to play?
We could make small 3 sided AAR, what do you think? to make some PR to this kind of MP :wink:
Oh, for diplomacy, we could send a little note with the save-file, like:
"Shall be forge an alliance? Just ask the AI." And then there's the possibility of having bad luck and the AI refusing, but it's an idea :P
I'm not sure of the maxes of 5 will help the AI enough.. that could mean many rebels on your "return" to the game. Breaking agreements penalty doesn't have to be reduced if we just use the method above - somebody proposes to the other, that can try to accept or refuse the proposal entirely.
Each player should keep all the changes that happened to the others... and should send it to them with the save file...
Here is our map:
http://img55.imageshack.us/img55/9495/hr17early9pj.jpg
if I am the starter and first change is 30 in minutes, I pick Ani
what will be your choices?
NOTE: at the start the starter (so I?) has to pick a game where he's not at war with any of other players, of course
Oh, there's a problem there...we should limit conquering of eachothers' provinces to 1 province/30 mins maybe? Otherwise, one could get a savegame where his province would be reduced to 1 province.. :S
War at the start is not really a problem, I think, but not desirable.
I'm not sure how much time I can get though, what do we do, one round a day or so?
I'd like to be Spain or Aragon, by the way.
--
Lastly - who will compile the necessary files? It's easiest to have it compiled in one .ZIP/.RAR/.ACE/.TAR.GZ/.{yourextensionhere}, because that way we are 99% sure that everybody has the same files installed for this Cooperative Multiplayer Massive up to Four Player Knights of Honor Game by E-mail (CMMFPKHGE).
I don't have the 1.7 mapchanges yet, so I elect Elvain.. ^_^
Angryminer
22-03-2006, 23:02
I think it's okay to limit the amount of conquered player-vs-player-provinces. Get's my :go: .
About my nation, I think I choose Hungary.
Angryminer
ok, so I'll do it on friday and send you all (both)
and we can start to play on weekend maybe?
One round per day is ok, maybe even too much...
As I know my situation if we would play total of 90 minutes in 5 days it would be good...
my playdays may be weekends (mostly), tuesdays and fridays...
but I would move the limit of conquered provinces to 2... conquering one by one would be too slow, especialy if one is retaken back...
Very well!
Limit of 1 province is really good I think, the game is not really meant to wipe eachother out is it.. and a conquered province isn't really easily taken back if the AI lost your best Marshalls.
sorry, I'm little too busy to do anything around this now... if you have some more free time than I , make the improvements, send them to me and I will just put it together with HR1.7maochanges and then we could play (as soon as I will save some time)
Angryminer
30-03-2006, 15:53
I'd like to suggest a rule (of thumb):
The player who sends away his played savegame is responsible for starting the AI for his country. It is not obligatory to switch to the next player's country, but adviced.
So the sequence of ending your playing-phase is as follows:
1. Start the AI for your country.
2. Optionally switch to the country of the next player. (Comment follows)
3. eMail the savegame to the next player.
About the second step:
If you don't switch to your next player's country he will look at your court when he opens the savegame. If you do switch do the next player's country you will see his court. Either way, one player is going to know the court of the other. So I think we'll just put the cards on the table and make no mistery about out knight's levels. That's why it can be optional.
This isn't a game of hard competition, I think all players can be fair to each other regarding this information-leak.
When recieving the savegame the procedure is as follows:
1. Recieve savegame by eMail, install it and load it.
2. If you notice the player before you forgot to activate his AI, it'd be nice to do so for him. Be fair.
3. If necessary, switch to your country.
4. Turn off the AI for your country.
What is important in this post:
When you give up the lead of your country it is your responsibility to make sure the AI is playing. If you do not make sure it does it may be possible that no one will be leading your country until you recieve the savegame again.
I think that's the best solution. :go:
Angryminer
I agree.
It is your responsibility to swith the AI on.
Thugh I think it could be nice that before you start to play your game to pause the game and turn all kingdoms AI on and then switch your kingdom's AI off.
What do you think abuot sending some small and short reports about other player's kingdoms?
When one plays, he will just regard what happens to other players' kingdoms like agreements (including breaks), wars/peaces with conditions, loss/expansion of territory; all with noted time (at least in cases of negative actions like breaking agreements and wars)
Angryminer
30-03-2006, 16:28
I think those reports should be in the form of an AAR here in the forum.
Angryminer
Agreed (thrice).
I'm afraid I don't have the time to play (either) at the moment.. :sad:
Lord_Nick
07-04-2006, 05:21
Hi there,
I like this idea of co-operative game play, but I'd like to make a slightly different suggestion ... would anyone be interested in playing in a "best ball" format?
In golf, you can play in "best ball" tournaments, where 2 or more players are on a team. All players will hit a ball. They then pick the best hit ball from all the strokes, and all players shoot their next ball from that location.
So in KOH:
We would all start with the same Mod, Kingdom, etc and play for the duration of one King's life/fixed time period. A common goal would be established up front (Reunite X kingdom, Minor Victory, Conquest of Europe, Voted Emperor, etc)
We would all have to submit our games by a certain deadline.
And then we would vote/decide which player had the best save game to continue from.
All players would install that save game, and play another king's life, etc until whatever goal is accomplished.
Thoughts anyone?
Angryminer
07-04-2006, 10:36
How do you measure "best" game? Is poor economy but one more conquered province "better" than a lot of money, many traders and obviously great economy or isn't 3 spies in enemy kingdoms, 2 daughters married to bigger kingdom and 2 good allies "better"?
Angryminer
Lord_Nick
07-04-2006, 13:41
Yes, I agree it's tough to measure objectively.
We could set a few ground rules up front.
All players would vote on which save game was the best.
In case of a tie in the voting, the winner would be the save game with:
(a) Highest overall kingdom power, or
(b) Highest ranking in overall kingdom power, or
(c) Lowest aggregate sum of all their rankings in all categories (eg You're rank #2 in overall kingdom power, #7 in province count, #15 in trading, etc. Your score would be 2+7+15+... = 24+. Compare all the save games scores, and the lowest (best) number wins.
It would be pretty easy to set up a spreadsheet to track all that if everyone collected their rankings from the exit screens, and then submitted them as they posted their save game.
Would also be easy to see which players consistently played better week to week since their performance could be graphed.
Whoever won that week's round would have to submit the AAR of how they achieved what they did.
vBulletin v3.5.4, Copyright ©2000-2007, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.